Literature. — Moulton-Geden, Concord, to Gr. Test.; Grimm- Thayer, Gi: Lex. ; Westcott, Com. on John ; Expos. Gr. Test. and works referred to there. A. B. MACAULAY.
KENOSIS — The word K^yuaLs is not itself found in the NT, but the verb Kcvdoi to empty, to make empty, occurs in Ph 2', where AV renders ' made himself of no reputation,' but the KV correctly 'emptied himself (see Lightfoot's Com. in loc., and Grimm-Thayer's Greek-Enrjlish Lexicon). It is disputed among theologians as to the extent to which the Son of God stripped Himself of His Divine prerogatives, but it is not necessary here to discuss these ditt'erences, as the purpose of this article is only to collect the evidences the Gospels aflbrd of the actual conditions of the Incarnation. But two questions may here be very briefly touched on before we pass to tliis subject.
(1) We may glance at the description of this Keno.iis of the Son of God found in the Apostolic writings. The passage in Philippians (2''-') lays stress on the .surrender, on the one hand, oi the form of God ('the glories, the prerogatives of deity,' Lightfoot), of equ.ality with (Jod ; .and the assuiil]i- tion, on the other haiid, of the form of a servant,
the likeness of man, self-humiliation and obedience ' even unto death, yea, the death of the cross.' In 2 Co 8" St. Paul describes the Kenosis as the aban- donment of wealth for poverty (the Divine for the human mode of existence). jj(-In four pregnant state- ments, in which the Christian salvation is brought into most intimate relation with the humiliation of the Son of God, this Kenosis is more fully de- fined : ' God, sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh [He shared the flesh, but not the sin], condemned sin in the flesh ' (Ro 8-') ; ' God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law' (Gal A*) ; ' Him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our behalf ' [the penalty of sin was endured by the sinless for the sinful (2 Co S^')] ; ' Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having be- come a curse for us ' [Christ as the sacrificial victim ' became in a certain sense the impersonalion of the sin and of the curse,' Lightfoot on Gal 3'']. The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews lays emphasis on the participation of the Son of God in flesh and blood, in order that He might be capable of dying (2") ; on His experience of temptation as enabling Him to sympathize with and succour the tempted (2'^ 4'^) ; on the obedience He learned by sufi'ering (5*). The prologue to John's Gospel may be regarded as Apostolic interpretation ; and there the Kenosis is described in the words 'and the Word became flesh ' (1", see Westcott in loco). It is the intention of all these statements to affirm the complete reality of the manhood of Jesus.
(2) We may glance at the attempts to define theologically the process of the Incarnation in the Kenotic theory, ' which seeks to make the man- hood of Christ real by representing the Logos as contracting Himself within human dimensions and literally Ijecoming man ' (Bruce's The Humiliation of Christ, p. 136. This lecture contains the best account in English of the modern Kenotic theories. Bruce distinguishes four types, the absolute dual- istic, the absolute metamorphic, the absolute seini- inetamorphie, the real but relative. The differences in these theories concern two points, the degree in which the Logos laid aside the Divine attributes of omnipresence, omnipotence, and omniscience in order to become man, and the relation between the Logos and the human soul of Christ, as retaining distinctness, or as becoming identical. As regards the first point, the theories are absolute or relative ; asregardjs the second, dualistic, metamorphic, senii- metamorphic). Of the speculative attempts to formulate the doctrine of the Incarnation, Ritschl says that ' what is taught under the head of the Kenosis of the Divine Logos is pure mythology' {.Tustiflcation and Reconciliation, pp. 409-411). Without endorsing the terms of this condemnation, the jjresent writer may repeat what he has else- where written on this matter. 'The Kenotic theories are commendable as attempts to do justice to the historical personality of Jesus, wOiile assum- ing the ecclesiastical dogma ; but are unsatisfac- tory in putting an undue strain on the passages in the New Testament which are supposed to teach the doctrine, and in venturing on bold assertions about the constitution of deity, which go far beyond the compass of our intelligence in these high matters ' ( The Eitschlian Tlieology, p. 271 note). The study of the facts of the life or Jesus proves undoubtedly the Kenosis, of which none of these theories otters a satisfactory explanation, as partly the data—i\\e inner life of the Gfodhead— lie beyond our reach. We now confine ourselves to the data offered in the Gospels. (A useful summary of the data, although by no means exhaustive, will be found in i'un-f's I>i.9.trrfrifiim.\', ' Tlii' Ccinsfiousnpss of ..ur L..1.I in His Mort.'il Life.' A.lamson in The 3fiii,n„ CJirist deals very (linionulilv "itli ull the data bearing on the knowleagc of Ciirist).
928
KENOSIS
KENOSIS